ArticleMultimedia tools and applications2023
Explaining sentiment analysis results on social media texts through visualization.
Article in Multimedia tools and applications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating Turkish society's approaches to hemorrhoid treatment using text mining and sentiment analysis methods.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Exploring Psychological Trends in Populations With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease During COVID-19 and Beyond: Large-Scale Longitudinal Twitter Mining Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- A hybrid self-supervised model predicting life satisfaction in South Korea.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Deep Learning Paradigm and Its Bias for Coronary Artery Wall Segmentation in Intravascular Ultrasound Scans: A Closer Look.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Today, Artificial Intelligence is achieving prodigious real-time performance, thanks to growing computational data and power capacities. However, there is little knowledge about what system results convey; thus, they are at risk of being susceptible to bias, and with the roots of Artificial Intelligence ("AI") in almost every territory, even a minuscule bias can result in excessive damage. Efforts towards making AI interpretable have been made to address fairness, accountability, and transparency concerns. This paper proposes two unique methods to understand the system's decisions aided by visualizing the results. For this study, interpretability has been implemented on Natural Language Processing-based sentiment analysis using data from various social media sites like Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit. With Valence Aware Dictionary for Sentiment Reasoning ("VADER"), heatmaps are generated, which account for visual justification of the result, increasing comprehensibility. Furthermore, Locally Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations ("LIME") have been used to provide in-depth insight into the predictions. It has been found experimentally that the proposed system can surpass several contemporary systems designed to attempt interpretability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.